What is the environmental impact of beef and lamb in the Australian diet?
The water and cropland footprint of Australian beef and lamb impacts are relatively low in the Australian diet.
Research shows that compared to other foods consumed in the Australian diet, the water and cropland footprint of Australian beef and lamb is low because their production is typically not reliant on irrigation and occurs predominantly on marginal land not suitable for cropping.
Through pathways outlined in the Carbon Neutral by 2030 Roadmap, the Australian red meat industry is reducing the climate impact of beef production.
Farmers like the Coffey family believe environmental responsibility goes hand in hand with productivity, ensuring that red meat can be good for the planet:
Should I be eating less red meat for the environment?
Australian research shows the environmental impact of the diet is largely determined by the amount of food consumed. Therefore, to consume a sustainable diet, all foods, including red meat, should be eaten in amounts recommended for good health.
When it comes to red meat, sustainable consumption in a healthy diet is three to four healthy, balanced red meat meals a week, in line with the Australian Dietary Guidelines.
Compared to eating less red meat, the research found that production and waste reduction strategies as outlined in the Australia’s red meat and livestock industry’s CN30 Roadmap are more effective ways to reduce the environmental impact of a healthy diet.
Australia’s red meat and livestock industry is committed to supporting sustainable production and consumption of red meat in a healthy diet. Progress has already been made in terms of the amount of water required to produce beef and in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. More industry initiatives are now underway as part of CN30 to reduce waste, make better use of land, invest in renewables and support reforestation.
Is it more environmentally friendly to eat less red meat?
To lower the environmental impact of a healthy diet, Australian research found that production and waste reduction strategies are key.
While eating all foods, including red meat, in line with Australian Dietary Guidelines is important for a healthy diet, production and waste reduction strategies have the greatest potential to reduce the environmental impact of the Australian diet.
Some plant-based meat alternatives like tofu and legumes, have lower climate impacts but higher water footprints compared to beef. Others, such as chicken and pork have higher cropland footprints compared to beef and lamb.
Most of the environmental impacts of agricultural commodities such as red meat occurs during its production and by adopting practices outlined in the CN30 Roadmap, climate neutral beef production can be achieved.
Through the Beef and Sheep Sustainability Frameworks, Australia’s red meat and livestock industry is committed to supporting adoption of sustainable practices.
United Nations report that increasing the productivity of livestock and reducing food waste, not eating less meat, is more effective to lower emissions.
The UN FAO 2023 report on livestock low emission pathways ranked the behavioural changes most likely to be effective in achieving a net zero target by 2050. Top ranking changes included driving productivity, improving genetics, animal welfare and carbon sequestration on farms, whilst reducing red meat consumption was not an effective change to reduce emissions.
Did you know?
Plant-based alternatives to red meat such as tofu and legumes can have a higher water-scarcity footprint than red meat.
Poultry and pork have a greater cropland-scarcity impact than red meat.
